ADHD and The Inverse Care Law

"The availability of good medical care tends to vary inversely with the need of the population served." — Dr. Julian Tudor Hart, 1971

Over fifty years later, Tudor Hart’s law remains disturbingly relevant in ADHD care.

Though not designed to examine equity directly, a recent BMJ study (2025) analysing data from over 148,000 individuals aged 6 to 64 with recent ADHD diagnoses suggests a troubling pattern: those most in need of treatment are least likely to access it.

The Inverse Care Law isn’t a relic, it’s a reality.

And in ADHD care, it’s costing lives.

Tackling Life's Sharpest Edges

The researchers compared individuals who began ADHD medication within three months of diagnosis with those who did not. Over a two-year follow-up, they tracked both first-time and recurrent events across five critical outcomes and found that ADHD medication was associated with meaningful protective effects by significantly reducing the risk of:

• Suicide attempts
• Substance misuse
• Transport accidents
• Criminality
• Recurrent accidental injuries

These findings reinforce the clinical value of timely ADHD treatment, not just for symptom relief, but as a powerful form of preventive care.

ADHD medication, when timely and appropriately prescribed, can help buffer individuals from some of life’s most dangerous edges.

Critical Nuances

Although the study did not set out to examine inequalities, its findings surface some troubling evidence, echoing the Inverse Care Law, where those who stand to benefit most from ADHD treatment are often those least likely to access it.

Living with unrecognised or unsupported ADHD can mean carrying the weight of rejection, academic failure, workplace breakdowns, and fractured relationships, each compounding vulnerability and risk.

The data expose how systemic neglect not only delays care but deepens harm.

• History of adverse events: Individuals with prior suicidal behaviour, substance misuse, or criminality experienced greater benefit from medication than those without such histories. This tells us that ADHD medication isn't just preventative; it's profoundly protective for those already caught in cycles of harm. This high cost of late intervention is measurable in lives disrupted and lost.
• Sex differences: While men carry the highest absolute rates of criminality, the relative protective effect of ADHD medication was more pronounced in women. Proportionally, women benefited almost twice as much against criminality as men. Yet women with ADHD are more likely to be overlooked, misdiagnosed, or dismissed. Historical under-recognition means many never receive the treatment that could protect them the most. This underscores the urgency of equitable access to diagnosis and care, especially for women.
• Age differences: The strongest protective effects against recurrent suicidality were seen in young people, highlighting the life-saving importance of early intervention. Yet services for children and adolescents are overwhelmed, with waiting lists stretching into years. The mismatch between need and access is simply dangerous.
• Complexity penalties: Individuals with co-occurring psychiatric conditions such as personality disorders or substance use disorders were less likely to receive ADHD medication, despite being at higher baseline risk for adverse outcomes. This systemic under-treatment may reflect clinician hesitancy, concerns about polypharmacy, or viewing comorbidities as contraindications. Yet paradoxically, these individuals showed greater benefit from medication in reducing suicide attempts, substance misuse, and criminality. This points to a systemic bias in clinical decision-making and the need for equity-focused prescribing practices.

Together, these patterns reinforce a critical equity insight:

Those most harmed by delayed diagnosis or systemic neglect stand to gain the most from timely intervention, yet they are the least likely to receive it.

This doesn’t just leave inequality untouched. It amplifies it.

From Harm Reduction to Equity

ADHD isn’t just about being “distractible” or “hyper.” And medication isn’t just about improving focus, it’s a protective tool against high-stakes outcomes like suicide, substance misuse, criminality, and accidents. These are not fringe concerns, they are core public health and social justice issues.

This study strengthens the case for ADHD medication, but it also exposes the urgent need for systemic change, from reactive symptom management to proactive harm prevention. Timely access to diagnosis and treatment is not a convenience; delays and barriers are demonstrably dangerous.

The evidence underscores three imperatives:

• streamline pathways to care,
• prioritise high-risk and underserved groups, and
• embed equity into ADHD services by auditing clinical decision-making for bias and designing pathways that anticipate crisis rather than react to it.

Unless we confront these inequalities head-on, the very people who most need protection will continue to be left behind; denied the stability to survive, let alone thrive. The real question isn’t just whether ADHD medication works, but who gets it, when, and under what conditions.

It’s All About Prevention

The evidence is clear: ADHD treatment can be a lifesaving intervention, protecting individuals from some of the most devastating and costly consequences of untreated ADHD.

The challenge is ensuring it reaches those who need it most.

That means:

• closing the gender gap in diagnosis for women and girls,
• investing in early intervention for children and young people, and
• removing barriers faced by disadvantaged groups and people in the justice system.

ADHD medication is not just a clinical tool, it is an equity intervention, a justice issue, and a pathway to giving everyone the chance not just to cope, but to thrive.

‍